guidelines for tectogrammatical annotation of latin treebanks … · 2015-11-27 · gerundives are...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Guidelines for Tectogrammatical Annotation of Latin Treebanks
The Treatment of Some Specific Constructions
Marco Passarotti
Berta González Saavedra
The Index Thomisticus Treebank Project
CIRCSE Research Centre
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan Italy
** Work in Progress **
November, 2015
This document describes the treatment of some specific constructions in
the tectogrammatical annotation of the Index Thomisticus Treebank and the
Latin Dependency Treebank.
Only those constructions that are either not covered by or are treated
differently from the guidelines for tectogrammatical annotation of the
Prague Dependency Treebank are reported here.
2
Table of Contents
LACK OF THE GOVERNING VERB IN "NOMINAL CLAUSES" .................. 4
TWO NEWLY ADDED NODES DEPENDING ON GERUDIVES ..................... 4
NEWLY ADDED NODE(S) DEPENDING ON PARTICIPLES USED AS ADJECTIVES .. 4
RESPECTU ......................................................... 5
VALUE OF GRAMMATEMES DISPMOD, VERBMOD, TENSE IN MODAL
CONSTRUCTIONS .................................................... 6
SEMPOS OF IDEM AND ALIUS USED AS SEMANTIC NOUNS .................. 6
ITA/SIC...SICUT/UT ............................................... 6
VALUES OF “INDEFTYPE” GRAMMATEME BY LEMMA ........................ 6
ANNOTATION OF PARTICIPLES, GERUNDS AND GERUNDIVES IN THE
TECTOGRAMMATICAL LEVEL ........................................... 8
PERIPHRASTIC CONSTRUCTIONS WITH GERUNDIVE ........................ 9
ANNOTATION OF VIDEOR/VIDETUR .................................... 11
CONSECUTIVE CLAUSES WITH ITA…QUOD OR ITA QUOD ................... 11
SEMANTIC PART-OF-SPEECH OF ADVERBIAL FORMS OF PARTICIPLE ........ 12
“NECESSE EST” AND “OPORTET” AS MODAL VERBS ...................... 12
POSSIBILE/IMPOSSIBILE EST + INFINITIVE OBJ ...................... 13
SUM + INFINITIVE WITH MEANING: “IT IS POSSIBLE TO” .............. 13
UT/SICUT-CLAUSES WITH MEANING “FOR INSTANCE” .................... 14
QUOD QUID EST ................................................... 14
PERIPHRASTIC CONSTRUCTIONS TO BE ABSORBED INTO AUTOSEMANTIC NODES
................................................................ 15
3
SEMPOS OF DE-ADJECTIVAL, DE-VERBAL AND DE-NOMINAL ADVERBS ....... 15
RELATIVE CLAUSES WITH SUBJUNCTIVE ............................... 16
RELOCATION OF THE ATV NODE (ATS) IN THE COMPL NODE (TGTS) ....... 16
FUNCTOR FOR PARTITIVE COMPLEMENTATIONS OF SUPERLATIVES .......... 17
NEGATIVE MODAL VERBS ............................................ 17
PASSIVE CONSTRUCTIONS WITH INFINITIVE ........................... 18
MISSING CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES AND SEMANTIC
PROPERTIES ...................................................... 18
#ASMUCH ......................................................... 19
NE AS A CONJUNCTION ABSORBED BY THE VERB ........................ 19
PARS IN PERIPHRASTIC PREPOSITION ................................ 20
RELATION BETWEEN M-LEMMA AND T-LEMMA ............................ 20
COORDINATION OF NODES WITH DIFFERENT FUNCTORS ................... 21
TANTO-QUANTO, TANTUM-QUANTUM (DISTRIBUTION AND USES) ............ 22
OPUS EST ALIQUA RE .............................................. 23
RELATIVE CLAUSES WITH FINAL, CONCESSIVE, OR OTHER VALUES ........ 24
T_LEMMA OF THE PRONOUN IS, EA, ID ............................... 24
SOME SPECIAL CASES OF ANNOTATION OF SUBORDINATE CLAUSES ......... 24
NOT COLLAPSING MODAL VERBS ...................................... 26
SPECIAL CASES ................................................... 28
4
Lack of the governing verb in "nominal clauses"
Nominal clauses that are interpreted as verbal present the lack of the
governing verb, which cannot be recovered from the context (i.e. the
missing verb is not a copy of a verb occurring in an ATS). See the
Tectogrammatical guidelines (p. 198): "usually a simple verb could be
inserted into such constructions, however this possibility is not a
necessary condition for interpreting this constructions as verbal".
The missing head verb of a nominal clause interpreted as verbal must be
added to the TGTS as a newly added node. This node is assigned the t-
lemma substitute #EmpVerb (nodetype: qcomplex).
The nodes that depend on the #EmpVerb node are assigned a functor
according to their semantic role in the clause (see figure 6.26 in
http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch06s04s01.html#pic232slov6).
This is in accordance with
http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch06s12s01.html#elipsa1.1.2
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++2.N.-1.4-1.8-4 "[...] unde sapiens dicit,
beatus vir qui in sapientia morabitur [...]".
In this example, the utterance "beatus vir" lacks the head verb, which
could be thought to be "sum", but this is not the point. A new node is
added, depending on "dico", with t-lemma substituted #EmpVerb (nodetype:
qcomplex). The functor PAT is assigned to it, because this is the
semantic role of the node. The words "vir" and "beatus" are assigned the
functors ACT and PAT respectively, because these are the semantic roles
according with the utterance they are in.
Two Newly Added Nodes Depending on Gerudives
Gerundives are assigned 2 newly added nodes (at least 2: if a three-
argument verb is concerned, you should add three new nodes):
1. #Gen, ACT, topic
2. #PersPron, PAT, topic: with textual coreference to the (usually)
noun modified by the gerundive
Example: “rebus nominandis”. Nominandis heads two newly added nodes:
1. #Gen, ACT, topic
2. #PersPron, PAT, topic: with textual coreference to rebus
ID of nominandis: SlaT-005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-2.1-1.5-1-n8
Newly Added Node(s) Depending on Participles Used as
Adjectives
The participles used as adjectives (sempos: adj.denot) require ellipsis
resolution of one or more nodes according to the following rule (this
rule is similar to and consistent with the previous one, that concerns
gerundives):
5
- present and future participles (active meaning): the node of the Actor
(ACT) must be added (with #PersPron t-lemma) and assigned a textual
coreference (coref_text) to the head noun in the tree.
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-2.23-2.25-1: "[...] artes aliis
principantes [...]".
o aliis:
� functor: PAT
o newly added node depending on principantes:
� t-lemma: #PersPron
� functor: ACT
� coref_text linking to artes
- perfect participles (passive meaning): the node of the Patient (PAT)
must be added (with #PersPron t-lemma) and assigned a textual
coreference (coref_text) to the head noun in the tree
Example: "Lesbia amata a Catullo".
o Catullo:
� functor: ACT
o newly added node depending on amata:
� t-lemma: #PersPron
� functor: PAT
� coref_text linking to Lesbia
Obviously, in addition to the newly added nodes mentioned above, all the
argument nodes that are missing must be replaced. For instance, in the
sentence “Lesbia amata”, two nodes must be added, namely the ACT and the
PAT (both with t-lemma: #PersPron; the PAT must be textually coreferred
with Lesbia).
NB: this rule does NOT cover all the possible cases and has not to be
applied in a blind way. There are several cases that do not fit this
rule. The semantics of the participle must always be taken into account.
See for instance a phrase like “lupus mortuus”. In this case, mortuus
depends on lupus and it is a perfect participle. However, the rule does
not apply here because morior is a deponent and one-valency verb (i.e. it
does not have a PAT among its frame elements). In this case, a #PersPron
node must be added (dependent on mortuus): this node is assigned the
functor ACT and gets textually coreferred with lupus (literally: “the
wolf that has died”).
A test to be applied in order to recognize the correct frame elements
(and their functors) is to replace the participle with a relative clause:
- “lupus mortuus” -> “lupus qui (ACT) mortuus est”
- “Lesbia amata a Catullo” -> “Lesbia quae amatur a Catullo” ->
[passive->active] “Lesbia quam (PAT) Catullus (ACT) amat”
- “artes aliis principantes” -> “artes quae (ACT) principantur aliis
(PAT)”
Respectu
In those cases where the word respectu functions as a preposition, it is
collapsed and it is referred to as an aux.rf of the word (or words, in
case of coordination) that it governs in the analytical tree.
6
Value of grammatemes dispmod, verbmod, tense in modal
constructions
In the case of infinitive verbs, the value “nil” is assigned by default
to the following grammatemes: dispmod and verbmod.
An exception holds in those cases where in the analytical layer the
infinitive verb depends on a modal verb (possum, debeo, volo, oportet…):
in these cases, the node of the infinitive verb in the tectogrammatical
layer (which includes the modal one) is assigned the same grammatemes of
the modal verb.
For instance, see sentence 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-3.11-2.12-5: “oportet
esse”. The node sum in the tectogrammatical tree (despite corresponding
to the infinitive form esse) is assigned the values of the grammatemes
dispmod, verbmod, tense of its analytical governor oportet.
Sempos of Idem and Alius used as semantic nouns
In those cases where the lemmas idem and alius are used as a noun, they
assigned respectively sempos “n.pron.def.demon” (idem) and “n.pron.indef”
(alius).
See: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-6.1-1.4-1. “eiusdem autem est…”
Ita/Sic...Sicut/Ut
In clause that include constructions like “sic/ita...sicut/ut”, all these
words (sic, ita, sicut, ut) are collapsed under the node of the
autosematic word (a verb) that heads the comparative subclause, which is
assigned functor CPR (subfunctor: basic).
For instance, “Sic Marcus facit aliquid sicut Paulus (facit)”. In this
sentence, the newly added node facio (functor: CPR) collects the nodes of
both sic and sicut.
The same holds for sentences like “Sicut Marcus facit, ita Paulus
(facit”). The node of facio (not the newly added one) collects both the
nodes of sicut and ita.
Examples:
- 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-5.7-1.8-3
- 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-6.4-2.7-2
Values of “Indeftype” grammateme by lemma
The Indeftype grammateme is assigned to the following t-lemmas according
to the tables below (NB: one lemma can be assigned different “indeftype”
values according to its meaning).
Relat (relative):
- Qui/quae/quod
Inter (interrogative):
- Qui/quae/quod
- Quis/quid
- ...
Indeftype1 (meaning: “someone”, “something” /whatever (person or thing):
- Aliqui/aliqua/aliquod
7
- Aliquis/aliquid
- Alius/alia/aliud
- Quidam/quiddam
- Quidam/quaedam/quoddam
- Quis/quid
- Quispiam/quidpiam
- Quispiam/quaepiam/quodpiam
- Quisquam/quidquam
- Ullus/a/um
Indeftype 2
- Alter/Altera/Alterum
- Uter/utra/utrum
- Uter/utravis/utrumvis
- Utercumque/utracumque/utrumcumque
- Uterlibet/utralibet/utrumlibet
Indeftype 3 (meaning: “whoever”, “anyone who” “whatever”):
- Quicumque/quaecumque/quodcumque
- Quilibet/quaelibet/quidlibet
- Quilibet/quaelibet/quodlibet
- Quisquis/quaequae/quidquid
- Quisquis/quaequae/quodquod
- Quivis/quaevis/quidvis
- Quivis/quaevis/quodvis
- Unusquisque/unaquisque/unumquidque
- Unusquisque/unaquaeque/unumquodque
Indeftype 4 (in Czech lecjiaky’ = more than one, every kind):
- Plerique/pleraeque/pleraque
- Complures/compluria
- Plurimi/plurimae/plurima
- Ceteri/ceterae/cetera
- Reliqui/reliquae/reliqua
Total1 & Total2
Lemmas totus, cunctus, universus and omnis can be assigned the
“adj.pron.indef”, the “n.pron.indef” and the “adv.pron.indef” sempos.
In all these cases, they are assigned the “indeftype” grammateme
according to the following rule:
- value “total1”: totalizing adj./n./adv. referring to the whole of
something. Focus on “totality” in the sense of “entirety”:
- cunctus (totality as union of all the elements)
- totus (totality considered as a whole )
- value “total2”: totalizing adj./n./adv. referring to individuals.
Focus on “totality” in the sense of a “set of elements”:
- omnis (every element)
- universus (all the elements composing a totality)
Temporary solution! Indeftype total1: Solus/sola/solum
8
Annotation of participles, gerunds and gerundives in the
tectogrammatical level
Participles, gerunds and gerundives have a double nature according
to their semantics, because they are nominal (noun or adjective)
and verbal at the same time. According to the guide lines of the
PDT, all the nodes refering to nominal parts of verbs must be
annotated in their <sempos> as verbs (“v” value), in order to make
a lexicon valency bank where all verb forms fall together in the
same entry and there are not different entries according to the
sempos of the form, i. e., one entry for “duco” as a verb and
another one for “duco” as an adjective. As any other verb form,
all gerunds, participles and gerundives have a valency frame that
has to be reconstructed in case it is not expressed in the
sentence, i. e. all the arguments that the verb needs must be
expressed as #Gen if it is not clear from the context or it is an
impersonal construction, or #PersPron if it is already mentioned
(in this case the textual coreference must be made).
Grammatemes
Like any other verb, all these forms must be classified with the
seven grammatemes that are applied to verbs: deontic modality,
verbal modality, interativeness, dispostional modality, aspect,
tense, and resultative modality.
According to the guide lines of the PDT, those are the values of
all these grammatemes when there is a participle, a gerund or a
gerundive in the text:
GRAMMATEME VALUE
verbal modality “nil”: «As for nodes representing infinitives,
participles or transgressives (gerunds), the
value of the verbal modality grammateme is nil.»
(http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch05s06s04.html#komp6.4.3)
deontic modality “decl”
Gerundives:
A) having a sense of obligation: “hrt”
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-2.1-1.5-1:
“multitudinis usus, quem in rebus nominandis
sequendum philosophus censet”
B) acting as a verbal adjective: “decl”
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++3.N.--.1-1.2-2: “quis
modus sit possibilis divinae veritatis
manifestandae”.
dispositional
modality
A) Gerunds/Gerundives:
“nil”
(http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch05s06s04.html#komp6.4.3)
B) Participles
9
“disp0”
iterativeness according to the semantic of the verb it could be
‘it1” or “it0”
aspect this is a difficult point in discussion, because
Czech participles and infinitives distinguish
aspect, but Latin infinitives, gerunds and
gerundives don’t and only participles do.
According to this, only perfect participles would
receive “cpl” as aspect, all the other nominal
forms of verbs would receive “proc”.
resultative
modality
The “res1” is only applied to a specific Czech
construction
(http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch05s06s04.html#komp6.4.3)
Tense According to the guide lines, the tense values
are only applied to finite verb forms or gerunds,
because Czech infinitive and participles don’t
distinguish tense but aspect. In all those cases
the value assigned is “nil”.
(http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch05s06s04.html#komp6.4.3)
In Latin, gerunds and gerundives don’t
distinguish tense, but participles and
infinitives do. So, the tense value must be
assigned also to participles and infinitives
(instead of “nil”) according to consecutio
temporum. Roughly speaking, past participles and
infinitives are assigned the value “ant”; present
participles and infinitives are assigned the
value “sim”; future participles and infinitives
are assigned the value “post”.
Gerunds and gerundives are always assigned the
tense value “nil”.
DEVIATION FROM PDT GUIDELINES
Periphrastic constructions with gerundive
Like in constructions with modal verbs heading infinitives (e.g. “debeo
dicere”), in periphrastic constructions formed with a gerundive the
inflected verb (a form of lemma sum) acts as an auxiliary verb. This is
why it does not appear in the tectogrammatical level, but it is removed
and absorbed into the node of the gerundive.
This implies the following:
• the values of all the grammatemes of sum are assigned to the verb in
the gerundive, as well as all the other annotations that the inflected
verb may have (like, for instance, is_member, sentmod, etc.).
10
Among the grammatemes, ONLY “deontmod” is assigned the original value
“hrt” (inherited from the gerundive), in order to keep the sense of
obligation of these periphrastic constructions;
• the functor of sum is assigned to the gerundive;
• all the nodes depending on sum are made dependent on the gerundive.
NB: the ACT of sum takes the PAT functor according to the passive
meaning of the periphrastic construction with gerundive (this is a
tendency: real data can show exceptions);
• the id of sum is reported into the “aux.rf” of the gerundive in the
usual form (SlaA...-n...).
Examples
005.SCG*LB1.CP--++5.N.-1.5-4.8-2
et ideo demonstrandum est quod necessarium sit homini divinitus credenda
proponi etiam illa quae rationem excedunt.
• the values of all the grammatemes (and of other annotations, as well;
namely: “sentmod”= “enunc” and “is member”= “1”) of sum are assigned
to demonstro (t_lemma of demonstrandum), but “deontmod”, which is
assigned value “hrt”;
• the functor PRED is assigned to demonstro;
• all the nodes depending on sum are made dependent on demonstro with
their functors, except the cluse “quod necessarium sit”, which is
assigned functor PAT;
• a node #Gen is newly added depending on demonstro, with functor ACT;
• the id of sum is reported into the “aux.rf” of procedo with this form:
SlaA-005.SCG*LB1.CP--++5.N.-1.5-4.8-2-n4.
005.SCG*LB1.CP--++9.N.-2.1-1.4-1:
ad primae igitur veritatis manifestationem per rationes demonstrativas,
quibus adversarius convinci possit, procedendum est.
• the values of all the grammatemes (and of other annotations, as well;
namely: “sentmod”= “enunc” and “is member”= “1”) of sum are assigned
to procedo (t_lemma of procedendum), but “deontmod”, which is assigned
value “hrt”;
• the functor PRED is assigned to procedo;
• all the nodes depending on sum are made dependent on procedo with
their functors;
• a node #Gen is newly added depending on procedo, with functor ACT;
• the id of sum is reported into the “aux.rf” of procedo with this form:
SlaA-005.SCG*LB1.CP--++9.N.-2.1-1.4-1-n16.
11
Annotation of videor/videtur
A) Impersonal Construction (ACT PAT)
“alicui videtur quod/AcI…”
Videtur heads:
- a dative (alicui), with functor ACT. If the dative is missing, a
#Gen node is newly added with functor ACT
- the quod/AcI construction, with functor PAT
B) Personal Construction (ACT PAT EFF)
“alicui aliquid videtur esse”
“alicui aliquid videtur bonum”
Videor heads:
- a dative (alicui), with functor ACT. If the dative is missing, a
#Gen node is newly added with functor ACT
- the syntactic subject (Sb afun in the analytical layer), with
functor PAT. In the example: aliquid
- the nominal predicate (Pnom afun in the analytical layer), with
functor EFF. In the example: esse/bonum
NB: in cases like “aliquid videtur bonum”, we do NOT add a new node
heading bonum (like an empty verb, or a node with t_lemma sum), in order
to highlight the copulative function of videtur. Instead, in “aliquid
videtur esse bonum”, videtur heads esse (EFF), which embodies the
copulative function
Consecutive Clauses with ita…quod or ita quod http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch08s07.html
Case 1: “ita…quod”
A clause introduced by quod which is considered consecutive because of
one occurrence of ita in the sentence (with afun AuxZ in the analytical
layer) is annotated as follows (consistently with the above mentioned
guidelines of the PDT):
- ita: functor EXT
- quod: absorbed into the autosemantic node of the head verb of the
consecutive clause
- head verb of the consecutive clause:
o made dependent on ita: this implies to move the node from its
position in the analytical layer (which is dependent on the
verb of the main clause)
o functor RESL
Example: SCG_2, sentence 23: “ita tamen imperfectum quod…invenitur”:
- ita is assigned functor EXT
- invenio is made dependent on ita and assigned functor RESL
Motivation: here ita is an adverb that modifies a specific lexical item
of the sentence (indeed, it is assigned AuxZ in the analytical layer),
which must be retained in the TGTS too.
Case 2: “ita quod”
12
Case:
a clause is introduced by the multiple subordinating conjunction ita
quod. In the ATS, ita quod is annotated as follows:
- quod: AuxC
- ita: dependent on quod, AuxY
TGTS:
- both ita and quod are absorbed into the autosemantic node of the head
verb of the consecutive clause
- the node of the head verb of the consecutive clause is assigned
functor RESL
- a new node is added between the head verb of the main clause and the
head verb of the consecutive clause, i.e. this node:
o depends on the node of the head verb of the main clause
o governs the head verb of the consecutive clause
o is a qcomplex node of the type #AsMuch
o is assigned functor EXT
Motivation: here ita is a clause adverb (AuxY) and does not modify a
specific lexical item of the sentence, but it is part of a multiple
conjunction
Semantic Part-of-Speech of adverbial forms of participle
Although their t-lemma is the base verb, adverbial forms of participles
are assigned sempos “adv…”.
Motivation: the (only) competitor to sempos “adv…” here is sempos “v”,
which is discharged because grammatemes of semantic verbs do not apply to
adverbial forms of participles.
Example: convenienter (SCG_1, sentence 7). Lemma: convenio. Sempos:
adv.denot.grad.neg
“necesse est” and “oportet” as modal verbs
The constructions of necesse est and oportet, when followed by a
subjective clause (infinitive or finite, e.g. quod/quia/ut+subjunctive),
behave like a modal verb.
Therefore, the adjective and the verb (in the case of necesse est) and
the verb (in the case of oportet) are absorbed into the node of the head
node (i.e. the predicate) of the depending clause.
For example:
Oportet:
a-005.SCG*LB1.CP--++3.N.-4.5-6.8-2
“oportet quod [...] sit modus [...]”
The head verb of the depending clause (sit):
- absorbes the nodes of oportet and quod -> the IDs of oportet and quod
are reported in the aux.rf.
- is assigned the following grammateme values:
- aspect: “proc”
- deontmod: “deb”
- dispmod: “disp0”
13
- iterativeness: “it0”
- resultative: “res0”
- tense: “sim”
- verbmod: “ind”
Necesse est:
a-005.SCG*LB1.CP--++3.N.-1.2-4.8-2
“[…] necesse est prius ostendere […]”
The head verb of the depending clause (ostendere):
- absorbes the nodes of necesse and est -> the IDs of necesse and est
are reported in the aux.rf.
- is assigned the following grammateme values:
- aspect: “proc”
- deontmod: “deb”
- dispmod: “disp0”
- iterativeness: “it0”
- resultative: “res0”
- tense: “sim”
- verbmod: “ind”
The deontmode of the depending infinitive is assigned the value “deb”.
This phenomenon does not apply when the constructions with necesse est or
oportet are nominal.(In those cases the nodes are not absorved:
-aliquid oportet: aliquid is assigned the functor “act” and oportet is
assigned the corresponding grammatemes and the corresponding fuctor.
-aliquid necesse est:aliquid is assigned the functor “act”, necesse is
assigned the functor “pat” and the corresponding grammatemes and est is
assigned the corresponding grammatemes and the corresponding fuctor.
Possibile/Impossibile est + Infinitive Obj
The constructions like “Sb est possibile/impossibile + infinitive”, where
the infinitive depends on possibile/impossibile with afun Obj in the ATS,
are treated as follows in the TGTS.
The nodes of est and possibile/impossibile are collapsed into the node of
the infinitive. Thus, the node of the Sb is made dependent on the node of
the infinitive.
In case of impossibile, a new node (nodetype: atom; t_lemma: #Neg) is
added, depending on the infinitive.
Example: SCG_5, sentence n. 155
[…] quod possibile est non moveri […]
- ATS: moveri depends on possibile via Obj; quod depends on est via Sb
- TGTST: possibile and est collapse into the node of moveo, which heads
est and non.
NB: in case the sentence was […] impossibile est non moveri […], a new
#Neg node would be added, depending on the node of moveo
Sum + infinitive with meaning: “it is possible to”
When in ATS the verb sum heads an infinitive via Obj, this means that the
meaning of the clause is “it is possible to…”.
In TGST:
14
- the node of sum is collapsed into the node of the infinitive and all
the nodes depending on sum become dependent on the infinitive
- the node of the infinitive is assigned deontmod “poss”
- all the grammatemes and other features (e.g. is_member) of the verb
sum are assigned to the infinitive
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP-1++3.N.11.1-1.3-5
[…] non sit procedere in infinitum […]
- ATS: procedere depends on sit via Obj
- TGTS: the node of sit is collapsed into the node of procedere, which
is assigned deontmod “poss” and all the other grammatemes and features
of sum
Ut/sicut-clauses with meaning “for instance”
NB: change in PDT guidelines
According to the PDT guidelines, the “for instance” constructions are
considered a mixed apposition.
See here: http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch06s06s02.html#pic234sour22
We propose a new way to analyse the “for instance” construction, which is
easier: the node of the conjunction (e.g. ut/sicut) is absorbed into the
node of the word that acts as example, which is assigned functor “CPR”
with subfunctor “nr”, because none of the available values of the
subfunctors of CPR expresses properly the semantics of “for instance”.
The dependencies remain the same of the ATS.
Example:
005.SCG*LB1.CP--++2.N.-4.1-1.6-4
“[...]quidam eorum, ut mahumetistae et pagani [...]”
The functors assigned to these words are the following:
- quidam: “ACT”
- eorum (t-lemma #PersPron): “RSTR”
- ut: absorbed into the mahumetista node
- mahumetistae (t-lemma mahumetista): “CPR”, subfunctor “nr”
- et: “CONJ”
- pagani (t-lemma paganus): “CPR”, subfunctor “nr”
Quod quid est
The expression quod quid est is a translation of the Greek sentence to ti
en einai, from Aristotle, where quod corresponds to the Greek article to.
Treatment of quod quid est in TGTS:
- quod is absorbed into the head-node of the expression (sum)
- a newly added node is made dependent on sum; this newly added node is
a qcomplex #Gen node and it is assigned functor ACT
- qui (ATS: quid) is assigned functor PAT
15
An example is found in 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++3.N.-4.1-1.5-5
Periphrastic constructions to be absorbed into
autosemantic nodes
A periphrastic construction can introduce a dependent clause, e.g.
“propter hoc quod” (005.SCG*LB1.CP--++4.N.-4.11-1.15-8) or “ex quo”
(005.SCG*LB1.CP--++4.N.-2.3-3.5-4), or “secundum quod”.
In these cases, the periphrastic construction has to be absorbed into an
autosemantic node, as follows:
• all the nodes that form the periphrastic construction get absorbed
into the the head node(s) of the dependent clause, i.e. the
predicate of a verbal phrase, or the head-noun of a nominal phrase,
including possible modificators of the pronoun, like ipso.
To do it, the analytical IDs of the nodes are reported into the
“aux.rf” box of the predicate and the nodes of the periphrastic
construction are removed from the TGTS.
Beside the constructions mentioned above (“propter hoc quod” etc.), a
number of such constructions is formed with the word ratione. In
particular, the constructions are the following: (a) ex ratione alicuius
rei; (b) in ratione alicuius rei; (c) ratione alicuius rei. In these
cases, the nodes for in/ex and ratione are absorbed into that for res.
Example1: 005.SCG*LB1.CP-1++8.N.-3.1-2.4-3
“ex ratione compositionis”: the nodes for ex and ratione are absorbed
into the node of compositio and the analytical IDs of ex and ratione
appear into the aux.rf of compositio (likewise the ID of potest).
Sempos of de-adjectival, de-verbal and de-nominal adverbs
Adverbial forms derived from adjectives, verbs or nouns, i.e. those
adverbs whose “t-lemma” is different from the form (e.g. praecipue:
praecipuus; convenienter: convenio; forte: fors), are assigned the same
sempos of their “t-lemma” and the correspondent grammatemes:
Differently, un-inflected adverbs (like semper, diu, etc.), i.e. those
whose “t-lemma” is identical to the form, are assigned sempos adv…
Example 1
- form: convenienter
- t-lemma: convenio
- sempos of t-lemma: v
- grammatemes: the ones of a participle present, i.e.:
o aspect: “proc”
o deontmod: “decl”
16
o dispmod: “disp0”
o iterativeness: “it0”
o resultative: “res0”
o tense: “sim”
o verbmod: “nil”
Example 2:
- form: praecipue
- t-lemma: praecipuus
- sempos of t-lemma: adj. denot
- grammatemes: the ones of an adjective, i.e.:
o degcmp: “pos”
o negation: “neg0”
Relative clauses with subjunctive
Relative clauses with the verb inflected in the subjunctive case are
assigned any possible value but “decl” for the “deontmod” grammateme.
Most of the times, the value to be assigned is “poss”, i.e.,
“possibility”.
The value of the “verbmod” grammateme is always “ind”.
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++5.N.-2.18-1.20-2
“pauca proposuit quae humanae rationis inquisitionem excederent”
excedo is assigned the following grammatemes:
- aspect: “cpl”
- deontmod “poss”
- dispmod “disp0”
- iterativeness “it0”
- resultative “res0”
- tense “ant”
- verbmod “ind”
Relocation of the Atv node (ATS) in the COMPL node (TGTS)
In ATS, a node with afun Atv (NB: only Atv, not AtvV) depends on the node
of the noun it agrees with.
In TGTS, a nodes corresponding to an ATS Atv node:
- is (mostly) assigned functor COMPL
- it is moved under the governing node of the clause (i.e. its predicate
verb). Motivation: semantically (TGTS), these nodes are adjunct
17
complementations of the head verb (and not the noun); syntactically
(ATS), they depend on the noun because of the agreement
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++6.N.-2.12-1.15-5
ut idiotae et simplices, dono spiritus sancti repleti, summam sapientiam
et facundiam in instanti consequerentur.
In the ATS, the node of repleti depends on the node of et (because it
modifies both idiaotae and simplices).
In the TGTS, the node of repleo does not depend on the node of the
coordination (as in the ATS), but on the node of consequor (relocation of
the node).
Repleo is assigned the functor COMPL and it has a compl.rf. that links to
the nodes of idota and simplex.
Functor for partitive complementations of superlatives
The functor to be assigned to partitive complementations of superlatives
is DIR1.
The definition of DIR1 functor is the following:
http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch07s04s01.html
The definition (also) says that “a modification with the DIR1 functor can
also have the meaning of a selection from a group of objects; e.g.:
jeden z chlapců.DIR1 (=lit. one of (the) boys)
nejlepší z lidí.DIR1 (=lit. (the) best of men)"
The example at work here is “the best of men”, where “of men” is a
complementation that represents “a selection from a group of objects”
Example in the IT-TB: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++6.N.-3.10-6.14-3. “maximum
miraculorum”
Negative Modal Verbs
Negative modal verbs like nequeo or nolo are treated like regular modal
verbs, i.e.:
• the grammatemes of the modal verb are assigned to the infinitive verb
+ the the deontic mode (deont) of the modal verb
• the id of the modal verb must appear in the auxiliary references
(aux.rf) of the infinitive
• the node of the modal verb is removed
18
In order to keep the negative meaning of the modal verb, an atomic node
with #Neg t_lemma and RHEM functor is newly added, depending on the
infinitive verb.
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++7.N.-4.1-2.3-2
contrariis rationibus intellectus noster ligatur , ut ad veri cognitionem
procedere nequeat .
• the grammatemes of nequeo are assigned to procedo and the deontmod
grammateme is assigned the value “poss”
• the id of nequeo appears in the aux.rf of procedo (and also all the
aux.rf comparing in the nequeo node come to the aux.rf of procedo,
like ut)
• the node of nequeo is removed
• an atomic node with #Neg t_lemma and RHEM functor is newly added,
depending on procedo
Passive Constructions with infinitive
In (personal) constructions featuring a passive head-verb and a dependent
infinitive (dicuntur esse), the subject of the passive head-verb in the
analytical layer becomes the ACT (or the PAT, accordign to the voice of
the infinitive) of the infinitive verb:
005.SCG*LB1.CP--++6.N.-3.1-1.10-5:
solum simplicium , sed sapientissimorum hominum , ad fidem christianam
convolavit , in qua omnem humanum intellectum excedentia praedicantur ,
voluptates carnis cohibentur et omnia quae in mundo sunt contemni docentur ;
omnia, the subject of docentur in the analytical layer, becomes the PAT
of contemno in the tectogrammatical layer; so the node of omnis is moved
and depends on contemno. The arguments of doceo ACT and ADDR are newly
added nodes, and contemno is the PAT.
Missing correspondence between morphological features and
semantic properties
When there is not correspondence between the morphological features of a
word and its semantic properties (like for pluralia tantum), the latter
must be reflected through the grammatemes.
E.g. the gender of the noun animal is neuter, but semantically it is an
animate; so the grammateme for gender assigned is “anim”, corresponding
to the property of animacy of the noun.
19
#Asmuch
According to the PDT tectogrammatical rules (p. 805 and ff.;
http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-layer/html/ch08s07.html),
a node with the t-lemma substitute #Asmuch and a corresponding functor
(usually, EXT) and subfunctor “basic” must be added when the expression
referring to the high or low degree of an aspect of the governing event
is omitted in the surface form of the sentence. The node with the t-lemma
substitute #AsMuch stands in place of the expression referring to the
high or low degree (e.g.: tak málo (=so few/little), tak špatně (=so
badly), tak dobře (=so well), tak hodně (=so much/many), tak moc (=so
much/many)).
In the tectogrammatical annotation of Latin, the node #Asmuch is added in
the following cases:
1. when the introducing element is part of the connective of the RESL
clause (like in the multiple subordinate conjunction ita quod: ita
depends as “AuxY” on quod in the analytical layer):
sentence 005.SCG*LB1.CP-1++0.N.-1.1-1.6-7: “haec autem consideratio
[...], superflua fortasse quibusdam videbitur, qui asserunt quod
deum esse per se notum est, ita quod eius contrarium cogitari non
possit, et sic deum esse demonstrari non potest.”
In this case a new node #Asmuch is added depending on sum (lemma of
est) and the verb cogito (lemma of cogitari possit) depends on this
newly added node with functor RESL (and the nodes of ita and quod
are absorded in the node of cogito).
2. when the introducing element is missing in the governing clause
(for instance, there is no ita, tantum etc. in the sentence) and
the context shows that the depending clause has a functor value
RESL.:
sentence 005.SCG*LB1.CP-1++0.N.-2.9-8.10-7: “ut sic saltem in
intellectu iam deum esse oporteat.”
In this case, the preceding predicate (hoc autem formatur) must be
reconstructed by ellipsis resolution. According to the context, a
node #Asmuch is built and made dependent on formo (lemma of
formatur). The node of sum (lemma of esse oporteat) depends on
#Asmuch by RESL. The node of ut gets collapsed into the node of
sum.
Ne as a conjunction absorbed by the verb
Like all the conjunctions, the conjunction ne (AuxC in the analytical
layer) is absorbed into the node of the head-verb of the clause
introduced by ne.
This makes the semantic feature of negation carried by ne to be lost in
the tectogrammatical level. This is solved by adding a new node #Neg.
E.g. 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++8.N.-3.8-4.11-2
sed ne te inferas in illud secretum , et arcano interminabilis
nativitatis non te immergas , summam intelligentiae comprehendere
praesumens
20
The conjunction ne is absorbed into the nodes of the verbs infero and
immergo, and a #Neg node is newly added, depending on infero, in order to
keep the negative sense of the sentence.
NB A #Neg node is not newly added as depending on immergo (or common to
both verbs, i.e. depending of the copula et), because the negation of
immergo is already expressed by non (depending on immergo). Otherwise,
the #Neg node newly added should have been common to both verbs, and
should be dependent on the copula et. This is quite common when
coordinate constructions depend on ne, i.e. “ne … 1st-verb et non 2nd-
verb”.
Pars in periphrastic preposition
The noun pars can take part in the periphrastic preposition ex parte
alicuius rei.
Both the nodes of ex and of pars are absorbed into the node of the noun
in genitive. Their ids appear as auxref of the noun in genitive, as if
they were one preposition.
Relation between m-lemma and t-lemma
According to the section 4.2 in the PDT guidelines about the relation
between a node's t-lemma and m-lemma and between its t-lemma and wordform
(http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch04s02.html), the following are the correspondances
between the m-lemma of some pronouns & quantificatives and their t-lemma.
e.g. the nodes with m-lemma aliqui are assigned t-lemma qui.
m-lemma t-lemma
aliqui qui
aliquis quis
duplex duo
qualiscumque qualis
quantuscumque quantus
quicumque qui
quidam qui
quilibet qui
quisquis quis
seipse ipse
singulus unus
21
trinus tres
unusquisque quis
uterque uter
Coordination of nodes with different functors
Since the rule is not trivial, see:
http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-
layer/html/ch06s06s01.html#pic234sour14
There are cases where two or more coordinated nodes are assigned
different functors.
This contradicts the principle of coordination, which says that the
coordinated elements have to be equal.
The PDT guidelines state to make an ellipsis resolution, i.e. to
coordinate the head-verb (on which the two, or more coordinated elements
depend) with a copy of it and to make each of the coordinated elements
with different functors depend of each head-verb.
Here, we part from the PDT guidelines, allowing one or more different
functors to be coordinated. This is for two main reasons: (a) it is more
simple (no new nodes are added); (b) it faces the truth (there is no real
ellipsis working here); (c) it preserves better the information (see the
query below to search for all such cases, that the PDT-style loses).
Fictional example: "I run fast and with my brand new shoes". Here, a MANN
("fast") and a MEANS ("with my brand new shoes") are coordinated.
List of some cases in the IT-TB:
Phrase Functors Elements
SCG_1/ 167 MEANS and AUTH efficacia (MEANS)-
violencia (MEANS)-
promissio (MEANS)-
tyrannis (AUTH)
SCG_2/97 MANN and MEANS naturalis (MANN) -
#PersPron (MEANS)
SCG_3/1 TWHEN and MEANS unus (TWHEN)- #PersPron
(MEANS)
SCG_3/3 TWHEN and MEANS unus (TWHEN)- #PersPron
(MEANS)
SCG_3/121 TWHEN and MEANS unus (TWHEN) – ratio
(MEANS)
SCG_3/186 TWHEN and MEANS semper (TWHEN) – pars
(MEANS)
22
Query to be used to retrieve all such cases:
t-node $n0 :=
[ nodetype = "coap",
t-node $n1 :=
[ is_member = 1 ],
t-node $n2 :=
[ functor != $n1.functor, is_member = 1 ] ];
Tanto-quanto, tantum-quantum (distribution and uses)
The adverbs tanto-quanto can appear in two different sintactic
constructions:
• tanto and quanto are part of two paratactic clauses, coordinated by a
comma: 005-SCG*LB1.CP-1++4.N.-2.9-5.12-1
• quanto is part of a subordinate clause depending on a main one (where
tanto occurs). The predicate of the subordinate clause (where quanto
occurs) is assigned afun “Adv”: 005-SCG*LB1.CP-1++8.N.-5.1-2.4-2
According to these possible syntactic constructions, the tectogrammatical
annotation of tanto-quanto is different:
• in the first case, both adverbs are assigned the functor EXT and the
functors of the head verbs are assigned the functor value according to
their semantic role in the sentence.
• in the second case, both adverbs are assigned the functor EXT, but the
head verb of the quanto sentence is assigned the functor value CPR,
with subfunctor “basic”.
NB: the second structure is also possible with tantum-quantum, but it is
not frequent.
Other uses of tantum
Tantum can also be used:
• as a verbal or noun modification that introduces consecutive
sentences: in this case, it is assigned the functor value EXT and the
23
subordinate clause (usually introduced by ut) depends on tantum with
the functor value RESL: 005-SCG*LB1.CP--++5.N.-4.3-3.7-9.
• as a verbal or noun modification with no consecutive value but with
the meaning “very”. In this case, it is assigned the value EXT. This
is the most frequent use of tantum: 005-SCG*LB1.CP-1++3.N.22.9-5.11-1.
Other uses of quantum
Quantum can appear with a comparative meaning in a construction similar
to the tantum-quantum construction, where the lemma tantum is not
present. In this case, the head verb of quantum is assigned the functor
value CPR, with subfunctor “basic”: 005-SCG*LB1.CP-1++8.N.-3.1-2.4-3
Quantum can also be a part of a periphrastic construction (quantum ad
aliquam rem); in this case, in the ATS quantum depends on ad as an AuxZ.
In TGTS, the node of quantum is collapsed into the head noun (just like
the node of ad is) and this is assigned the functor value REG:005-
SCG*LB1.CP-2++0.N.12.11-3.13-1
Opus est aliqua re
The periphrastic construction opus est aliqua re is annotated in the ATS
in the following way:
• the form of the verb sum is the head-node
• the noun opus depends on sum via Sb
• the ablative depends on opus via Atr (because all the nominal
modifications in the ATS are assigned the afun value “Atr”)
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP-4++3.N.13.5-2.9-4.
In the TGS, this construction is treated as follows:
• the node of sum is collapsed into the node of opus
• the node of opus heads the whole structure
• a #Gen node depending on the node of opus is newly added with the
functor value ACT, to render the impersonality of the construction
• the node of the ablative depends on the node of opus with the functor
value PAT
NB: the node of opus is assigned the value “v” for the grammateme
“sempos”; the others grammatemes are filled according to the values that
would be assigned to sum, except “deontmod”, which is assigned “deb”.
Example: 005.SCG*LB1.CP-4++3.N.13.5-2.9-4
In this case the node of opus is assigned the values:
• “proc” for aspect
• “deb” for deontmod
• “disp0” for dispmod
• “it0” for iterativeness
• “res0” for resultative
• “v” for sempos
• “sim” for tense
24
• “ind” for verbmod
NB: no entry for opus est aliqua re is added in the valency-lexicon,
since no periphrastic construction is reported there.
Relative clauses with final, concessive, or other values
The relative clauses which have a final, concessive or other type of
semantic value, are moved from the nominal head to the verbal head above
the nominal one, because these kinds of values affect the predication,
not the noun phrase.
In such clauses, the relative pronoun maintains the grammatical
coreference with the (nominal) node it refers to, but the head of the
relative clause (i.e. its predicate) is moved from the nominal head to
the verbal head.
Example: a-332 (Caes, Gall. 2,2): His nuntiis litterisque commotus Caesar
duas legiones in citeriore Gallia novas conscripsit et inita aestate in
ulteriorem Galliam qui deduceret Q. Pedium legatum misit.
In this sentence, the relative clause is "qui deduceret" and the relative
pronoun stands in grammatical coreference with Pedium (lemma Pedius), but
since it has a final sense ("in order to conduct -them to the Gaul-"),
the head verb of this clause (deduco) is moved and it is made dependent
on mitto (the PRED) instead than on Pedius.
T_lemma of the pronoun is, ea, id
The forms of the demonstrative pronoun and adjective is, ea, id have
t_lemma "is" (and not #PersPron) in accordance with the treatement of all
the other demonstrative pronouns and adjectives (hic, ille, isdem, ipse).
Some special cases of annotation of subordinate clauses
Problematic issue
Subordinate clauses with the syntactic function of subject or object of a
verb (in ATS) that are respectively not ACT, or PAT (or any other
functor) of that verb in TGTS.
NB: so far, this issue concerns subject or object subordinate clauses
only because we have not found evidence for other afun. But, in
principle, this is possible.
Following are the specific cases concerned:
(A)
Subordinate clauses featuring the relative pronoun qui in nominal
function.
How to treat them in TGST:
25
1- a newly added node #PersPron is made dependent on the head verb of
the main clause. This newly added node is assigned its functor
according to the semantic role of the depending clause (e.g. if Sb of
an active verb: usually, ACT). The grammatemes are assigned in
accordance with the morphological features of the relative pronoun of
the subordinate clause (person, gender, number, politeness);
2- the subordinate clause is transformed into a relative clause
depending on the #PersPron. Its head verb is, thus, assigned functor
RSTR;
3- a grammatical coreference is made from the relative pronoun in the
subordinate clause to the newly added node #PersPron in the main
clause.
N.B.! This is the only case in which a #PersPron (not for the 1st or the
2nd person) can have no textual coreference.
Example:
005.SCG*LB1.CP--++1.N.-2.1-1.5-1
“[…] sapientes dicantur qui res directe ordinant et eas bene gubernant .”
1- a newly-added-node #PersPron is made dependent on the head verb
“dico” with the semantic role PAT; the grammatemes are: gender
“anim”, number “sg”, person “3” and politeness “basic”
2- the subordinate clause “qui res directe ordinant et eas bene
gubernant” is made dependent on the #PersPron as RSTR, i.e. functor
RSTR is assigned to the two coordinated predicates (ordino and
guberno), which depend on the COAP node et (which, in turn, depends
on the newly added node #PersPron);
3- a grammatical coreference is made between the relative qui and the
newly added node #PersPron.
(B)
Subordinate clauses featuring an indefinite pronoun in nominal function
(e.g. quisquis, quicumque, etc.).
How to treat them in TGST:
1- the indefinite pronoun is made dependent on the head verb of the
main clause. It is assigned its functor according to the semantic
role of the depending clause (e.g. if Sb of an active verb:
usually, ACT)
2- the subordinate clause is transformed into a relative clause
depending on the indefinite pronoun. Its head verb is, thus,
assigned functor RSTR
3- a new node is added (depending on the head verb of the relative
clause), with grammatical coreference to the indefinite pronoun.
Grammatemes: “inher” for gender, number and person, and “relat” for
indeftype. This node is assigned its functor according to its
semantic role in the depending (now, relative) clause.
Example:
005.SCG*LB1.CP--++7.N.-3.8-3.10-1
“quicquid igitur principiis huiusmodi contrarium est, divinae sapientae
contrariatur”
- the indefinite pronoun quicquid (lemma quis) is made dependent on the
verb contrarior with functor ACT
- the clause whose head is sum (contrarium est) is made dependent on the
node of quis with functor RSTR
- a new node is added depending on sum with functor ACT and with
grammatical coreference to the indefinite pronoun (node quis).
26
(C)
Subordinate clauses featuring an indefinite pronoun in adjectival
function, depending on a noun (e.g. quicumque, qui, quis, etc.).
How to treat them in TGST:
1- the noun which the indefinite pronoun in adjectival function
depends on, is made dependent on the head verb of the main clause.
It is assigned its functor according to the semantic role of the
depending clause (e.g. if Sb of an active verb: usually, ACT)
2- the indefinite pronoun in adjectival function depends on the noun
as a RSTR
3- the subordinate clause is transformed into a relative clause
depending on the noun. Its head verb is, thus, assigned functor
RSTR
4- a new node is added (depending on the head verb of the relative
clause), with grammatical coreference to the noun. Grammatemes:
“inher” for gender, number and person, and “relat” for indeftype.
This node is assigned its functor according to its semantic role in
the depending (now, relative) clause.
Example:
005.SCG*LB1.CP--++2.N.-5.1-1.3-1
“simul autem veritatem aliquam investigantes ostendemus qui errores per
eam excludantur”
- the noun error is made dependent on the verb ostendo with functor PAT
- the indefinite pronoun in adjectival function qui depends on error
with functor RSTR
- the clause whose head is excludo (per eam excludantur) is made
dependent on the node of error with functor RSTR
- a new node is added depending on excludo with functor PAT and with
grammatical coreference to the noun (node error).
Not Collapsing Modal Verbs
When the infinitive subordinate clause depending on a modal verb and the
modal verb do not share the same syntactic subject, the node of the modal
verb is not collapsed into the verb of the infinitive subordinate clause.
The value for the grammateme deontmod of the infinitive verb in the
subordinate clause does not change (the original value “decl” for an
infinitive is kept).
The functor of the infinitive subordinate clause is PAT.
This operation must be done to keep the information regarding to the
different subjects of both (the modal and the infinitive) verbs.
Example:
quoiusvis opes voluisse contra illius potentiam crescere (Sallust, De
coniuratione Catilinae, XVII)
In this sentence, the main verb is voluisse (lemma volo^velle, a modal
verb), and its subject is elided, but it is Crassus, according to the
context. The infinitive clause quoiusvis opes contra illius potentiam
crescere depends from it. The head verb of the infinitive clause is
crescere (lemma cresco) and its subject is opes (lemma ops).
In this case, the modal verb volo^velle is not made collapsing into the
node of cresco. The value of deontmod for cresco does not change to “vol”
(it remains “decl”). The infinitive subordinate clause depends on the
27
verb volo^velle with functor PAT.
28
Special Cases
Sentence: 005.SCG*LB1.CP--++6.N.-3.1-1.10-5 (SCG_1, n. 167)
quibus inspectis, praedictae probationis efficacia, non armorum
violentia, non voluptatum promissione, et, quod est mirabilissimum, inter
persecutorum tyrannidem, innumerabilis turba non solum simplicium, sed
sapientissimorum hominum, ad fidem christianam convolavit, in qua omnem
humanum intellectum excedentia praedicantur, voluptates carnis cohibentur
et omnia quae in mundo sunt contemni docentur;
This sentence features a coordination of phrases which must be assigned
different functors, which is in principle not permitted by guidelines:
- praedictae probationis efficacia,
- non armorum violentia,
- non voluptatum promissione, et,
- inter persecutorum tyrannidem
The first three phrases are assigned the functor MEANS, but the fourth is
assigned the functor LOC, with subfuctor “betw”.
The particular semantic structure can be appreciated only in the TGST,
because in the ATS all phrases are assigned the afun “Adv”.
Breaking the rule that states that coordination must hold between nodes
with the same functor only is here meaningful, since it shows a variatio
by the author.